Elizabeth Warren to Hold Big-Dollar Fund-Raiser for Joe Biden

[writes3000]

Ms. Warren, in the mix for the Democratic vice-presidential nomination, had made opposition to fund-raising events with big donors a central part of her own presidential bid.

WASHINGTON — Senator Elizabeth Warren, whose full-throated opposition to high-dollar fund-raising events was a central tenet of her presidential campaign, has agreed to host such a gathering of donors for Joseph R. Biden Jr., the presumptive Democratic nominee, who is considering her to be his running mate.

The online event is set to take place on June 15, according to three people with knowledge of the plans, who spoke under condition of anonymity to share the details.

During her presidential run, Ms. Warren explicitly vowed not to attend private fund-raisers or dial up rich donors. A Massachusetts progressive, she championed tax increases on the wealthy and at times sharply criticized big-money donors. Her rise in public opinion polls last summer deeply concerned many veteran Democratic donors, particularly those on Wall Street and in the banking sector who believed she would damage their industries.

Ms. Warren’s spokeswoman declined to comment. Biden campaign officials did not respond to requests for comment.

More at link:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/23/us/politics/biden-fundraising-elizabeth-warren.html

Any thoughts about this? Interesting political calculus.

[BannonsLiver]

1. I'm glad she's doing it. We're going to need the money.

[writes3000]

2. I agree there. I really like Elizabeth Warren.

My mind keeps going back to her for V.P.

[BannonsLiver]

4. I don't think she will be the VP

I think he’s going to pick someone that didn’t run for President this year. That’s not news though. Everyone here has their own theory on how it’s going to play out! We’ll know in a couple of months.

As to your point about politicking, I can’t imagine this would hurt Warren’s chances. It’s a nice gesture that also has the effect of aiding Biden’s funding. So I’m sure they appreciate it a lot.

[writes3000]

5. There are so many great VP choices but I keep coming back to her.

She is such a fierce advocate and strong communicator.

And i admit this is somewhat cynical but I also think her voice on the campaign trail would be powerful. She lost her brother to COVID. This isn’t a hoax to her at all.

[BannonsLiver]

6. No, she understands the suffering it has caused for sure.

I’m writing this about 20 minutes away from her high school. Joe could do worse for a running mate, that’s for sure. She’s a gem. We’ll know soon.

[qwlauren35]

3. It hurts.

It shows me how desperate we are.

This race is both so close and so serious that "principles have to be compromised".

I hope she's not doing it to get on the ticket. To me, that's going in the wrong direction.

[Funtatlaguy]

12. 4 more years of Trump MUST not happen. Period

[JI7]

14. LOL , if fucking "principles" get in the way of stopping Trump then fuck those "principles"

[Hortensis]

17. Only with those who don't understand that both corruption

and incorruptibility depend on the person, not the money. Donors know when they're donating to people who can't be bought and when they're donating to scum. That's why they make the choices they do. But most of the time they're donating for government that shares their ideology.

Also, btw, until Trump, even Republican presidents really were above being bought. They're too powerful for that nonsense.

Choose for good people to have good government. And don't get mislead about campaign posturing. Posture is not ethics.

[brooklynite]

7. She had already said she would do big $$ fundraisers if she became the nominee...

[flamingdem]

8. Joe/Elizabeth!

I like the way it feels..

[writes3000]

11. I think I'm with you.

Although I will be just as dedicated to the fight whomever joins the ticket.

[betsuni]

9. Glad we're finally over the idea that fund-raisers with big donors somehow corrupt our candidates.

Calling Democrats corrupt if they accept the legal limit from a rich person because rich people only care about money and therefore cannot want progressive policy. Accusing Democrats of corruption with zero proof. Ridiculous. Stupid! Can't believe how much time was wasted on that.

[GulfCoast66]

13. I guess people think FDR was a working class laborer before getting elected President.

The most progressive president ever was a very rich man.

[betsuni]

15. Doesn't fit the narrative, so is ignored along with a hell of a lot of other history.

Nutty.

[blogslut]

10. Fine with me

One side want to kill us all. I'm not on that side.

[CentralMass]

16. Apparently the monied interests always win.

[betsuni]

18. Win what?

[Hortensis]

20. Don't you realize some people can't be bought?

Big donors certainly do. Those investing in expected monetary returns donate Republican.

Also, for god's sake: one party is intensely corrupt and the other is not. DO NOT MISTAKE US FOR THEM. .

To have good government, we have to elect good people. As long as we can't elect good people in GEs without money, to put it mildly, spitting at all those who raise it is a really, really bad way to make the cut. Warren didn't change personality from honest to corrupt.

Also, remember that while Sanders was the Big-Money candidate, more than everyone else combined, all that money completely failed to buy the Democratic Party's primary nomination. So did Bloomberg's pots of gold when he briefly stepped in to be rejected.

The guy Democrats chose was the major candidate who won with a lifetime reputation for being one of the good people who can't be bought. That reputation should count big with people who care as you do about corruption. He won our Democratic primary with almost no money, mounting no giant internet money-harvesting operation and also refusing big donations.

But the GE's different. We have to draw more voters to the polls.

[CentralMass]

21. I will be voting for our nominee this November. However

on this issue, big money come with strings attached. Cleary the GOP is a pack of evil bastards that need to beaten whenever possible.
But when I look at the policies that have been favored and bills that have been passed over the last 3 or 4 decades I feel they have put the country in a downward spiral. The deregulation and protection of the banking and financial industries and the feeding frenzy that ensued that brought us to our knees. We have a government that puts the interests of corporations, financial industry and the wealthy first.

[Hortensis]

22. No kidding. When FDR was elected, the people ALSO

elected Democrats to control both houses of congress. Liberal progressive Democratic control continued for the next 12 years.

It took a Great Depression hurting the middle class bad, not just lower income, to cause that electoral commitment to change for the better. We haven't had that degree of commitment since, and in 1978 the electoral balance shifted conservative and it's been downhill to disaster ever since.

But if we do get the power, it'll once again be very different. WE ARE NOT THEM. There is an incredible difference between a career serving big donors and doing just enough for donors to get reelected so you can continue the work you came for.

There is also an incredible difference between entering government to destroy it on behalf of big donors and entering government to use it to serve the people.

[CentralMass]

24. Pardon my skepticism but I have little hope.

[Hortensis]

26. I can't. Imo, allowing corrupt enemies to define us to ourselves

-- to destroy our commitment to putting our principles to action -- is incredible weakness. No one who does that has any right to blame others for the mess we're in.

All this has been studied, measured, reported many times over and is out there for people who look. But it's also in the newspapers almost every day. Count the crimes and check the parties.

The vast majority of today's corruption is by conservatives. On the economic side, their national party (and many state parties) has become entirely corrupted to serve the very wealthy. Why on earth would people who vow contempt for government join it except to join the rest at the trough? They believe -- like you -- that corruption is the way it is, only in their case that works for them. These days that's what they get elected FOR. Serving those who put them in office with expectation of being rewarded, often after some years of service with high-pay jobs, is the career.

Liberals otoh mostly come to office BELIEVING in government of, by and for the people and the career is wanting to be part of that. This basic orientation is a limitation on most corruption, which is mostly limited to what they have to do to raise money for reelection so they can stay in the game and not forfeit it to the bad guys.

Yes, big donors have too much influence, but most of the ones donating to buy big influence don't donate more than token amounts to Democrats because they can't begin to get what they want from us compared to from the Republicans. Plus, surveillance by our party leaders on the watch for unacceptable developments is another limitation. And they do find out when some conservative ringer or other problem has slipped in.

Of course people who don't understand this incredible basic, before-all-else difference between today's Democrats and Republicans are very easily suckered and turned against themselves. But the first person each should blame for that is himself. Sure, the picture's muddied by unfortunate truths and mountain of of lies, but there's no excuse for not understanding the vast differences when literally decades of truth are available to all.

[CentralMass]

27. I'm a Democrat and have never failed to vote for our nominee

in the 4 decades that I've been eligible to vote. I understood the the difference between the parties. But our own party has had a core that voted for and even championed deregulation and other legislation that harmed and took away protections for for average people.
These policies created the beast that has crippled us.

[Maxheader]

19. Pros and cons

pros:
-Tough
-Savy
-Popular
-Creative

cons:
-a little over the top, at times..
-needs to talk with the 27%ers..more..
-i've not read a foreign policy,

[tritsofme]

23. Her attacks on such events during the campaign were disingenuous

But glad to see she is doing everything possible to stop Trump now.

[Wanderlust988]

25. I hope Biden's campaign is stacking up their money. Their burn rate has to be low

He's staying at home. There are no rallies, hotels, food expenses, flights, etc. Their burn rate has to be extremely low. I'm thinking they should have plenty enough to wage an effective campaign in the fall.